High Volume vs Heavy Weight

I have read many articles trying to get to the bottom of which is best for what, but come up short. One thing that impresses me about South Africans is their competitive in sports so hopefully you guys will have at least some clue.

One thing I have heard from a somewhat reputable source is that High volume is for muscle definition and Heavy weight is for Muscle mass. I was thinking of maybe trying out the best of both worlds at next gym sesh.

One set heavy, then one set lighter with higher reps and keep alternating. This might be a bit overkill, but I just want to hear from the wise.

Well for me what works best is to do the heavy compound sets first for example bench press, which would be the heavy weights then later in the workout move to the more isolated exercises for example cable crossover fly then do high volume, the rest between sets is less with the high volume to keep the tension on the muscle. So you get the best of both worlds.

You need to find out what works for you first. Some guys grow like grass on heavy weight or high volume reps.

Heavy weight - strength Training? 1 to 6 Reps
High Volume - Cutting, endurance? 7 to 15 Reps Don't believe much in cutting weight, unless you talking about calories.

That's why most of the oakes on this site have 5+ years experience in gym and they know what works for them.

Personally heavy weight low reps up to 6-10, works for me when bulking for 8 weeks, 1 week break, then I change my program totally and go for 10 weeks ect.

Now I only do heavy weights one week and do high volume next just to give my joints a break and maintain my size and this works well even if I don't train for 2 weeks.

Na 2 weeke begin die gym sy muscles terug vat...

You will need to do either for at least 4 to 8 weeks consistently to see how your gains are.
Mine usually showed after 4 weeks.

Well I just got back from doing arms and I tried the high volume mixed in with the heavy and my arms have never been in so much agony ever, if it wasn't for the SARM I am on I would have been finished in the first 15 min :lol:

I will definitely take your suggestion Prae, for the next few weeks I think I will focus on high reps and see how it goes from there.

Hopefully I will feel the DOMS tomorrow because it has been a while since my arms were sore the next day (I think I have been stuck at a plateau for about 2 weeks now).

As long as you're applying progressive overload it doesn't matter what your training style is.

Personally, I've always stuck to strength training for compounds and gone higher rep ranges for accessory movements.

Worked for me, got stronger and bigger. Last year June my bench press was 95kgs and now it's 140 (1 rm admittedly), though one sarm cycle and two test cycles probably helped a lot with that. I absolutely love bp and heavy training, do it at least 2 times a week.

What works best for me (and it might not be the best for you) is to train to momentary muscular failure (MMF). This can be achieved by low weights and higher reps or heavy weight, low reps. I favour a programme similar to Dorian's Blood and Guts. You aim to reach MMF on you last working set between 6 and 9 reps.

This sort of training might not be for everyone. You will gasp for air as you finish the last few reps. Also there is only 1 min rest between sets. Very intense, for short bursts of time. You make sure you have recruited all muscle fibres in that last set. The failure will cause damage and you grow when you repair. Eats lots and sleep well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Heavy weight bulk and high volume cut. I always train to 10 - 12 reps, if i can do 13, up the weight by 2kg. First set ok for 13, but then rest time decrease for 2nd set. Feel and listen what your muscle you just trained is telling you. It should be shouting - Fuck you are hammering me PAIN, and then the pump starts of that muscle saying no more, give it half a rest, 30 seconds and start again, same shit, feel the muscle start crying around 6 reps and then you will know 12 reps is a fuck long way to go.

If you can only go 10 reps set 5, drop the weight by 4gk and do your 12 reps

Now follow 4 to 5 sets per muscle @ 12 reps like that, then you will grow like fuck.

Hodor wrote: Well I just got back from doing arms and I tried the high volume mixed in with the heavy and my arms have never been in so much agony ever, if it wasn't for the SARM I am on I would have been finished in the first 15 min :lol:

I will definitely take your suggestion Prae, for the next few weeks I think I will focus on high reps and see how it goes from there.

Hopefully I will feel the DOMS tomorrow because it has been a while since my arms were sore the next day (I think I have been stuck at a plateau for about 2 weeks now).

DOMS aren't indicative of a good/efficent workout. It's prevalent when you start off, or come back from a lay off, perhaps even changing routine. But you don't need to feel guilty if you don't get DOMS on the reg.

Sent from the flight launch deck using semaphore signals.

Oupa wrote: Heavy weight bulk and high volume cut.

Debatable, you use the term "high volume" pretty loosely so maybe I'm misinterpreting? Your weekly volume should always be high, to maximise muscle growth. IOW, work the muscle multiple times per week. As for volume inside a workout, that is completely dependent on your lifting experience. As you get more experienced, the more volume/intensity you'll need per workout. For hypertrophy at least, powelifters have some pretty technical programs that varies from this formula.

Going heavy: it's pretty important to keep your heavy compounds in your cutting phase. It's the most direct signal you can give your body that you still need (have use) for your current muscle mass. Also a good reason as to why cutting on cardio alone is retarded.

Sent from the flight launch deck using semaphore signals.

Hodor wrote: One thing I have heard from a somewhat reputable source is that High volume is for muscle definition and Heavy weight is for Muscle mass. I was thinking of maybe trying out the best of both worlds at next gym sesh.

Definition is directly linked to your bodyfat. But, if you don't have much muscle mass as is, you're just going to look under-fed. You're not going to get a striated chest from doing endless chest flies, you're going to get it when you unearth your pecs from the subcatounous fat, and if your muscle insertions (genetics) allow.

Sent from the flight launch deck using semaphore signals.

Fuck. So i have been doing it wrong for 22 years.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Thanks for the help guys.

I know I should probably start another topic for this, but I seem to have the attention of the greats. What are some of the best ways to get rid of fat around the nipples/lower chest (not gyno) just lacking chest. I have read that working upper chest can cause your lower chest to become more tightened up and mitigate some of that fat?

Oupa wrote: Fuck. So i have been doing it wrong for 22 years.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Jas Oupa, dit is moer moeilik om te weet as met my gui of as jy ernstig is. Jy weet ek bevraagteken nie jou ondervinding nie. Plus, ek't aspris nie oor jou tegniek kommentaar gelewer nie, want ek besef dit is baseer op jare se eksperimenteer.

To everyone else, my comments are from a scientific standpoint, based on latest, properly interpreted research. I'm by no way saying "I've got the body of Adonis so listen to me".

Peace.

Furk

Hey brother, you are welcome to bring "new age" research and shit to the forum. I respect your post. Your info is solid.

Mind to muscle is what counts, and you can train anyway you want. Thats what i tried to bring across...... maar om te tik, is soos snot pik in n kleuterskool, en mens verstaan altyd fokken verkeerd . Ek is seker jy verstaan.

Peace

There has been alot of research done about training to failure, and I recently read something some where about it doesn't matter the weight or rep ranges used to induce hypertrophy, it is all about training to failure. So you could use a lighter weight, perfect the form, slow negatives and go to failure and get the same if not more muscle growth than say doing 6 reps with the heaviest weight and risk injury. I mean we can look through the history books at some of the most awesome bodybuilders and how some of them don't use the biggest amount of weight, how ever do train to failure.

I personally feel that training to failure on your first exercise with compound movements is vital, then move on to more pump based stuff stopping 1 or 2 reps shy of failure.

You also need to figure out what works for you and what doesn't and that's the fun part.

Empire wrote: There has been alot of research done about training to failure, and I recently read something some where about it doesn't matter the weight or rep ranges used to induce hypertrophy, it is all about training to failure. So you could use a lighter weight, perfect the form, slow negatives and go to failure and get the same if not more muscle growth than say doing 6 reps with the heaviest weight and risk injury. I mean we can look through the history books at some of the most awesome bodybuilders and how some of them don't use the biggest amount of weight, how ever do train to failure.

I personally feel that training to failure on your first exercise with compound movements is vital, then move on to more pump based stuff stopping 1 or 2 reps shy of failure.

You also need to figure out what works for you and what doesn't and that's the fun part.

This is all true, great post. The latest studies have shown that low weight to failure and high weight to failure (30% 1RM and 90% 1RM) causes the exact same metabolic damage and protein breakdown in the muscle but that most people cannot reach true muscle failure of the targeted muscles using higher weight so the final recommendations for the studies were to use lighter weight with the slow eccentric, extended TUT and focus on full ROM of the muscle being worked.

There is a great training technique which I urge you all to try called the 3/7 method invented by french exercise scientists aimed to allow most people to reach true muscle failure.

You take your 10 rep maximum weight (on non compound lifts) and you do 5 sets (remembering slow eccentric, extended TUT and focus on full ROM with good mind muscle connection working AROUND the joints (in arcs)); in the first set you do 3 reps, the second set 4 reps, 5 reps etc until 7. The key being to only rest 15 seconds between sets. If you have not reached true muscle failure and are not wanting to cry from the pain by the end then you keep that weight and do the same thing again. Every single person I have told this to has come back saying how painful this workout was and how they feel they are already making more progress than ever before.

Please can you try this out at some stage this week? It is something I will be using on my clients in the future so your feedback would be appreciated.

Hormonas wrote:

Empire wrote: There has been alot of research done about training to failure, and I recently read something some where about it doesn't matter the weight or rep ranges used to induce hypertrophy, it is all about training to failure. So you could use a lighter weight, perfect the form, slow negatives and go to failure and get the same if not more muscle growth than say doing 6 reps with the heaviest weight and risk injury. I mean we can look through the history books at some of the most awesome bodybuilders and how some of them don't use the biggest amount of weight, how ever do train to failure.

I personally feel that training to failure on your first exercise with compound movements is vital, then move on to more pump based stuff stopping 1 or 2 reps shy of failure.

You also need to figure out what works for you and what doesn't and that's the fun part.

This is all true, great post. The latest studies have shown that low weight to failure and high weight to failure (30% 1RM and 90% 1RM) causes the exact same metabolic damage and protein breakdown in the muscle but that most people cannot reach true muscle failure of the targeted muscles using higher weight so the final recommendations for the studies were to use lighter weight with the slow eccentric, extended TUT and focus on full ROM of the muscle being worked.

There is a great training technique which I urge you all to try called the 3/7 method invented by french exercise scientists aimed to allow most people to reach true muscle failure.

You take your 10 rep maximum weight (on non compound lifts) and you do 5 sets (remembering slow eccentric, extended TUT and focus on full ROM with good mind muscle connection working AROUND the joints (in arcs)); in the first set you do 3 reps, the second set 4 reps, 5 reps etc until 7. The key being to only rest 15 seconds between sets. If you have not reached true muscle failure and are not wanting to cry from the pain by the end then you keep that weight and do the same thing again. Every single person I have told this to has come back saying how painful this workout was and how they feel they are already making more progress than ever before.

Please can you try this out at some stage this week? It is something I will be using on my clients in the future so your feedback would be appreciated.

I have done a few online training courses with the poliquin group and time under tension is the biggest factor they attribute break down of muscle tissue too. They like the 4020 timing or the 3010 timing always focusing on your ability to control the eccentric as well as the static hold at the bottom and top part of the movement.

I like your routine, it does sound pretty awesome and I will give it a bash. Now my question is why only 15 seconds between sets as it usually takes more than 15 seconds for you to regenerate atp and be used for the next set... would this not be more effective if you extended the rest period an additional 30 seconds?

I'm no expert, but I always find myself changing it up with different suggestions and each of them seem to work exactly like explained.

My personal opinion (no science hahaha) is that everything works the way it's explained and one is not better than the other. I feel that I get best results when changing it up every now and then which leads back to the old belief of never keeping the same routine for too long.

I do however think that some people find a great kick from one of the suggested methods due to genetics, lifestyle and mind-set.
For me personally the bigger is better got me going when I initially started training. In all honestly I think it was more psychological than anything else. back in my teens I started training with bigger older friends and had to keep up with guys 5yrs+ older than me. Prior to that I trained with volume and I think it just became monotonous until I nearly kakd myself trying to bench 80kg as a 15 yr old hahaha. To me this feeling was the best ever and my new love for "bigger is better" developed

Now later in life I am always discovering new things and decided to switch it up every few weeks. Every few weeks the new routine just seems to work like a bomb until it gets monotonous and I switch to an older technique... then the monotonous cycle repeats and I switch it up to something else again.

Is this because the technique doesn't work? NO! This is just how our minds play tricks on us... along with how the body adapts to new routines your results are sure to slow down.

So what I personally do is take everyone's advice and try to tweak it to fit in with my own style and BOOM I'm good to go. so knowing your body is very important and plays a big role in how you progress in this lifestyle.

some advice needs to be taken with a pinch of salt of course... because you will not "get a 6 pack in 30 days with the secret nobody wants us to know about. it's the latest craze and all the celebs are using it" :whistle:

Hormonas wrote:

Empire wrote: There has been alot of research done about training to failure, and I recently read something some where about it doesn't matter the weight or rep ranges used to induce hypertrophy, it is all about training to failure. So you could use a lighter weight, perfect the form, slow negatives and go to failure and get the same if not more muscle growth than say doing 6 reps with the heaviest weight and risk injury. I mean we can look through the history books at some of the most awesome bodybuilders and how some of them don't use the biggest amount of weight, how ever do train to failure.

I personally feel that training to failure on your first exercise with compound movements is vital, then move on to more pump based stuff stopping 1 or 2 reps shy of failure.

You also need to figure out what works for you and what doesn't and that's the fun part.

This is all true, great post. The latest studies have shown that low weight to failure and high weight to failure (30% 1RM and 90% 1RM) causes the exact same metabolic damage and protein breakdown in the muscle but that most people cannot reach true muscle failure of the targeted muscles using higher weight so the final recommendations for the studies were to use lighter weight with the slow eccentric, extended TUT and focus on full ROM of the muscle being worked.

There is a great training technique which I urge you all to try called the 3/7 method invented by french exercise scientists aimed to allow most people to reach true muscle failure.

You take your 10 rep maximum weight (on non compound lifts) and you do 5 sets (remembering slow eccentric, extended TUT and focus on full ROM with good mind muscle connection working AROUND the joints (in arcs)); in the first set you do 3 reps, the second set 4 reps, 5 reps etc until 7. The key being to only rest 15 seconds between sets. If you have not reached true muscle failure and are not wanting to cry from the pain by the end then you keep that weight and do the same thing again. Every single person I have told this to has come back saying how painful this workout was and how they feel they are already making more progress than ever before.

Please can you try this out at some stage this week? It is something I will be using on my clients in the future so your feedback would be appreciated.

Im def gonna try this next, do you have any specific excercises on this program to follow ensuring ROM?

Empire wrote: I like your routine, it does sound pretty awesome and I will give it a bash. Now my question is why only 15 seconds between sets as it usually takes more than 15 seconds for you to regenerate atp and be used for the next set... would this not be more effective if you extended the rest period an additional 30 seconds?

To be honest I don't quite know why they recommend 15 seconds I can only assume the goal is to not allow ATP to fully regenerate for some reason.

Im def gonna try this next, do you have any specific excercises on this program to follow ensuring ROM?

Chest - Cable flies (can cross over a tiny bit if you want but make sure it is not sloppily crossed over, it needs to be controlled)
Back is quite a tough one, I would probably stick to pullovers on the cables because cables are easier for this routine with all of the resting and multiple sets.
Shoulders - 45 degree delt raises (half way between directly to the side and in front)
Biceps - Inline bench curls
Triceps - Overhead tricep extensions on cables
Quads - extensions
Hammies - lying leg curls
Calves - seated calf raises for the soleus muscles
Forearms - reverse grip curl

Hormonas wrote:

Empire wrote: I like your routine, it does sound pretty awesome and I will give it a bash. Now my question is why only 15 seconds between sets as it usually takes more than 15 seconds for you to regenerate atp and be used for the next set... would this not be more effective if you extended the rest period an additional 30 seconds?

To be honest I don't quite know why they recommend 15 seconds I can only assume the goal is to not allow ATP to fully regenerate for some reason.

Im def gonna try this next, do you have any specific excercises on this program to follow ensuring ROM?

Chest - Cable flies (can cross over a tiny bit if you want but make sure it is not sloppily crossed over, it needs to be controlled)
Back is quite a tough one, I would probably stick to pullovers on the cables because cables are easier for this routine with all of the resting and multiple sets.
Shoulders - 45 degree delt raises (half way between directly to the side and in front)
Biceps - Inline bench curls
Triceps - Overhead tricep extensions on cables
Quads - extensions
Hammies - lying leg curls
Calves - seated calf raises for the soleus muscles
Forearms - reverse grip curl

Can you or maybe me start a new trend with this routine? Prefably you cause I dont want to make it look like I pinched your idea, then I can give feeback on this and ask questions, I have a few?

Any of you guys trained the Body by Science way by Dough Mc Guff?

Rooi Bul 86 wrote: Any of you guys trained the Body by Science way by Dough Mc Guff?

I read the book some years ago. Can't remember all the details without skimming through but I'll try and recall. So it's strict high intensity training, strict low volume. Tim Ferris used these principles in "4 Hour Body". The explanations and science were cool because I have a hard-on for scientific explanation. Reminded me a lot of Mike Mentzer, and to a degree Dorian Yates.

It's pretty extreme training that little per week. I would go nuts. I can't remember when the book was published so how much is relevant with today's findings I can't rightly say (like all sciences, new discoveries can be made and old hypotheses disproven). One thing is certain, fullbody infrequent workouts are a really good start for natty beginners.

Also, anabolic steroids changes the equation. Going harder, longer, more frequent, faster recovery and all that, you guys know...

But RooiBul this is like the opposite to what you do lol. You train p##s hard with variety and volume and tough cardio. Don't think this will give you the stimulus you are looking for unless you're on something like DNP.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Hi RooiBul. Yip have the book. I agree with Furk that is more for natty and general fitness. You wont build massive muscle by doing only 12 minutes of exercise a week. Although Mike Mentzer dis claim to train only once every 4-8 days. But he did go to beyond muscle failure. Some great techniques. Dorian tool the concept to a whole new level though but he did train weights 4 times a week for no more than 45 minutes. Also great techniques for going beyond failure. It is great to train this way.

Back to topic it probably fits in low volume heavy weights but with dropsets, forced reps, static holds or rest/pause to go beyond failure.

Have to love the Shadow!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi Oupa,

net gou uitvind sodat ek reg hier verstaan. Gaan jy wel met elke set op met die gewig aan een , en dit is dan een set?
ek het baie prober op lees op MI 40 training so prober nuwe dinge op te kyk wat werk die beste vir my.

op die oomblik doen ek meeste parymid en dan giant set.